Schllc

Feel horrible for that kid, having that on your conscience is a heavy load. People do what they want at uncontrolled fields. Be it ignorance, defiance, stupidity or just lack of situational awareness We have seen how atc can fail lately as well, so I’m not piling on uncontrolled fields, but with the experiences I have had, I am shocked it doesn’t happen more often.

No time frame on when/if that will be done.

I would love to see a deck full of turbo mooney’s!

Wouldn’t this work the same way as cars? Just phase them out, no need for a mandate. And yes, if someone tried to develop and get a new engine approved under current processes it would likely be 200k+. My point is that if the process for approval changed, there is no reason it would need to cost anywhere near that much.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/2-small-planes-collide-midair-regional-arizona-airport-leaving-2-dead

A clean sheet is exactly what i am talking about. I have no doubt they could negotiate all of these problems relatively easier. F1 Cars develop 1000hp with a 1.6 litre engine! The tech is available to do this, the problem is the FAA makes it cost prohibitive. Yes I realize a boat engine and an F1 engine are entirely different animals, but the hurdle is not physics, its an onerous approval process.

Mercury outboard engines have a 12:1 compression and utilize a direct injections that is if i recall correctly 2000-3000psi. There is available technology right now to solve this problem.

I don't believe this is true. The mercury outboard engines developed high pressure injection, this would address the detonation issue. It seems to me that the challenges of altitude, compression and power are much simpler than a designer fuel. But the larger point is that seeking new fuel has yielded nothing productive after all this time. Other options need to be considered.

Dont disagree with this at all, however... Your entire premise is predicated on the profitability and roi for manufacturers to build and deliver these engines. I just replaced an engine in a sprinter van for my company that came complete, with turbo and exhaust for 11k. Granted these engines are made in much higher quantities, but the second major factor is the approval process. The FAA needs to find a more efficient way to approve things for our planes. The clutch backspring is a great example. This is a $10 part at best, but the regulations are so onerous and obtuse that someone has to charge 2500 to make it work. There has to be a spot in the middle that works, there is no reason that our part 91 aircraft should have to meet some of these standards for parts. The only justification/explanation for this process remaining the way it is, is to either eliminate GA pistons completely, or rank incompetence. I personally believe it is the unspoken mission to eliminate all of our annoying little piston planes, and they are engaging in a war of attrition by just making it so stupid expensive, that even people with the money to burn can't swallow the pill. Replacement engines are not a simple solution, but 40years of whining about a replacement fuel hasn't gotten us anywhere so far, so at what point do you look for a different path? Or, just accept the FACT that the scant amount of lead our engines burn is like spitting in the ocean and saying you raised sea levels. Technically it may be true but really?

This issue needs a novel approach. the FAA needs to get its head out of its 18th century ass and make it easier to certify a new engine, that can have variable electronic ignition and eliminate the need for leaded fuel. Designing a new fuel is obviously a poor solution/approach we have the technology already…

A J may be a lower acquisition cost, but not sure maintaining an older plane is going to be that much cheaper than a newer plane. If you look at hours flown over miles, the ovation is probably not much more to own. I am not suggesting they are the same, just that they aren’t going to be as far apart as one would think.

It isn’t an unpleasant sound at all. I think any time your plane sounds different it seems acute at first. The da42 and the diamond star also whistl, and both had mt props.

Im pretty sure it doesn’t cross talk to the AP or EIS at all. Maybe the transponder. I just think it’s a more practical location in your were to ever need it… it’s a lot of work, that doesn’t really add value and questionable necessity. It would look cool and I don’t suspect the mfd is that much harder to reach in our planes.

The only difference in sound is on the ground it whistles a little and sounds choppier than the three blade. In cruise the noise isn’t very different, except it is quieter. Not sure how much is the door seal and how much is prop.

Yes, it is capable of 2700rpm.

Well, the additional noise is speed related!! never had the bravo but the lycoming in my Aerostar runs great low rpm and are quieter. do you have the inflatable seal in the acclaim?

It was explained to me that it is a minor mod that does not require the stc. That’s how it was logged in my logbooks. But to be honest I wouldn’t care how it was logged or even if it wasn’t logged. This is such an insignificant change that has zero affect on airworthiness…. I will never own another Mooney without this mod.

If you are interested in reducing wind noise in flight there really is no better option than installing a Bob Fields inflatable door seal. There has been a lot of discussion regarding this modification and I wanted to dispel some myths and clarify a few other items. The most difficult part of this process is the removal of the old seal. For this task I would recommend a brass wire wheel for a drill or hand grinder. Remove as much of old the seal as you can by hand and with a plastic scraper prior to using the brush. I would recommend that you open the door, remove your interior door panel, and remove the arm closer. This makes it much easier to get to everything for the install. The install directions say to remove the door from the airplane. This may make it a bit easier but is completely unnecessary. With the wire wheel, it’s important to use brass to prevent damage to the back sides of the rivets, you can clean the entire door in less than 30 min. Tape off the cabin, and mask the painted edges of the door to prevent accidental damage with the brush, and keep the debris from getting in the plane. If I ever do this again, I will do this part outside the hangar! After removing the old seal, clean the door with acetone, and then grease and wax remover. This ensures good bond with the adhesive. The directions suggest the inflatable nipple of the seal, be placed on the front side of the door but this isn’t possible with the door on the plane. I elected to drill the hole on the bottom forward corner of the door, where I could reach with a drill . With the interior of the door panel off, drill the hole for the nipple to pull through for connection of the pump bulb. Once again, I am going to contradict the instructions, install the interior door panel BEFORE you glue the seal in place. The reason for this, is that there are areas where the door seal actually laps over panel, which is important for the seal to completely contact the door jamb. The instructions also suggest trimming the door panel. I do NOT recommend this, at least not for the newer style panels. The door seal comes with a long section of hose which allows a lot of options for placement of the hand bulb. Connect this hose to the door seal and bulb while the glue is still wet and get inside the plane with the baggage door open, you will exit this way after installing the door seal. The adhesive sets rather quickly, so be prepared to move quickly. The only three really important points to monitor, one is where the nipple enters the door, two is the stud clamp at the top of the door and three, the bottom of the door where the door closer arm must pass between the door and the seal. Be careful when setting the seal that these areas won’t chaffe or pinch the seal. With the seal all glued, immediately get into the plane and slowly close the door making sure there are no pinch points or areas chaffing. Close and latch the door and then pump the ball about three or four times. This basically forces the seal into a tight fit. At this point, the ball is not mounted and has the long hose attached, so you can drape the hose with the extension out the vent of the pilots window and climb out of the baggage door. Allow a few hours for the glue to set, release the pressure of the seal and open the door. Now choose your mounting point, screw it down and you are finished. Geebee aeroproducts has mentioned on several occasions that this seal can damage door hinges. I can say with 100% certainty that this is not possible with the non electric model. Not only do you not need this much pressure to create the seal, it’s not possible to put much more than probably 10-15psi by hand with this equipment. I do believe it has a high likelihood of leaking while deflated in the rain, so if you are permanently on a ramp and do not have a water tight cover, this will be a big consideration. Some have said, just give it a few pumps prior to closing and this isn’t an issue. I don’t believe I will use this method. One because my plane is hardly ever on a ramp overnight, and two, I will do what I have always done with my Mooney, which is carry a roll of blue tape and cover the door gap and fuel caps if I’m on a transient ramp. I did not do a very good job documenting my work with photos, so I’m sorry I don’t have good visual aids, but I do have photos of the completed install and will be happy to discuss with anyone considering the install. The pics show some areas where the seal laps over the panel. What I found was that these areas had excessive gaps between the door and jams and laying on top of the panel helped fill the void. NOTE: I did NOT glue the seal to any part of the interior panel. Lastly, while some models are not listed on the STC, it is acceptable to install as a minor modification logged by your IA. This is a really easy install if you know the right process. I sure hope you find this helpful! One final note, don’t worry if the seal isn’t perfect and needs to be adjusted after install. It is not difficult to break the bond and re-glue!

PREP Prop has been installed! Unfortunately the wiring harness for the surefly did not arrive so I didn’t get the electronic ignition installed. But there was plenty more to do. In this visit with Brian K we got a good amount done. 1. Installed new prop and spinner. 2. Changed all exterior lighting to LED. 3. Two new magnetos and timing adjusted. 4. Chafe tape on cowling replaced. 5. Rerigged landing gear for door adjustments. 6. Flap actuator adjustment for correct position indications. 7. Bled and changed brake fluid. 8. Changed all landing gear pucks. 9. Installed bob fields inflatable door seal. 10. Changed landing light lenses. I almost wish that I had flown the plane with just the prop and done the door seal later. Both of these items were done for noise reduction, and both appear to have made a significant difference. The flight back from Texas was almost 5 decibels quieter which is an enormous improvement. the prop on the ground sounds really different, but the noise in cruise is extremely quiet. The prop response is much quicker and while the advertised weight savings of 28# is a flat out lie, there was an actual 18# weight saving which makes a pretty big difference in landing. I also notice that the elevator is about 1/2” less deflection in cruise and it appears to be about 3kts faster in cruise. The lower cowling is a little more difficult to remove and replace, but still easier than an ovation, and I can still do it alone. The TKS slinger ring is also a MUCH design than the hartzell and works much better. I am very happy with the prop and am thoroughly enjoying the restoration process. I will make a separate post regarding the door seal install, for any of those interested in installing. I believe after doing one, I could do it over again in less than 3 hours. It is incredibly simple once you know the shortcuts. Coming items…. updated fuel caps to new style. surefly mag install. new glass all the way around. New interior reseal of tanks new landing gear doors on right side. brake system overhaul. new paint. pending/contemplating type S conversion. corrosion X treatment. motor mounts. new panel cutout to install 275 in center and push mfd over. earthX batteries

I removed all of the factory lights with transformers and mounting hardware and I’m willing to part out if someone needs specific parts. two of the landing lights are regular incandescent and two are Precise Flight high intensity HID lights with transformers. Every single item was functioning when removed and is guaranteed to work upon receipt. id rather sell the whole package, but realize that probably isn’t what most folks need so let me know if any of this can help. All is 24v

Well, when I heard the drops it was still slightly above freezing. I didn’t pay much attention to it after the accumulation. I was pretty overwhelmed. I was a relatively new IR, so I was pretty thorough with my briefing. my mistake was listening to the controller who told me it was invalid. He made a mistake and there was an action as a result of the report I made. The sigmet was not invalid, I found out the hard way. it was a very edifying experience for me and it made it clear to me that controllers make mistakes too and if something doesn’t feel right, it probably isn’t. I sold the plane immediately after that and bought one with fiki. I still do not plan trips into icing unless there is a guaranteed escape route below me, and even then I have canceled more than a few times. People, of which I am included, tend to discount some of these stories and assume that it “isn’t as bad as people say”, or so rarely happens that way I’m safe…. but I can promise you, if you have a real icing experience, it will absolutely change your perspective. I cannot be adamant enough about how dangerous that stuff is, and the worst part is you don’t ever really know how bad it will be. In my case, another 10-20 seconds without action and it would not have been survivable. For those of you who have not had an icing interlude, This is NOT an exaggeration. I’d like to say it was skill, know how or reflexes, but in reality it was probably mostly just luck that it tuned out the way it did. I’ve heard guys talking about how they fly in the stuff and linger because of how well the tks fluid works… To each their own, but you won’t find me there.

it was foggy on the ground, in the mid 40’s but it wasn’t 0/0. Leaving Austin about 7-8 years ago, my plane was not icing equipped and there was a layer forecast for I think 17-19 k. The outer edge of the area was Austin. I had filed for 19 and the sigmet had popped up the morning after so when I picked up my clearance I told them I wanted to stay below the icing. when I took off and got Houston they told me that the sigmet was not valid and that they needed me at 19 or lots of rerouting. well when I hit 17k I noticed drops on the windshield and glanced at the wing. I saw ice there but when I looked back at the windshield I couldn’t see out of it. I looked at the wing again and I had several inches. My rate of climb went from 1400fpm to a descent and my airspeed went from 145 to about 90. it took less time for all that to happen than it did to type this. At this point my back pockets were touching. I did a 180 and lost about 7k of altitude and atc started fussing at me. I don’t recall what I said exactly, but it was not all professional. it was solid imc and while I wasn’t spacialy disoriented. I didn’t really know where I was with regard to airspace or direction. I was pretty much focused on the airspeed and the oat and trying to get somewhere warm enough to feel safe. At some point it either broke off the wings or melted enough for me to stabilize. all of this took about 10-15 min. It took about 45 min for the windshield to completely clear. I landed in Mississippi about 2.5 hours later and when I walked up to the fuel pump I noticed my hands were still shaking and I had sweated through my pants and shirt. It was 45 degrees on the ground…

After surviving an SLD encounter in my Mooney I can tell you that ice buildup significantly affects the Mooney and I have no desire to ever dispatch intentionally into icing in any aircraft. I firmly believe that people underestimate the danger. This is not to say they believe it “wont happen to me”, just in a genuine lack of understanding regarding how quickly it can happen. Once you experience it, your planning is forever changed.

While I don’t necessarily believe oil analysis to be a useless tool, I am very suspect of its accuracy for long term predictions. It may be able to indicate a serious and closely imminent catastrophic failure, but the numbers would look a LOT different from what is shown here. Even how the sample is drawn can dramatically impact these numbers. Say one oil change you do an oil change immediately after a 3 hour flight, when the oil is hottest, and maybe you are pushing 30 hours, as you are here. The next time you just drain it cold, and maybe you are closer to 20 hours, as your last sample. Or if you take the sample from the first drop of the draining, or the last of the residual oil. we are talking parts per million here… I don’t have any advice, but if it were me, I would fly the crap out of a 2016 acclaim with a 500tt engine with less than 200 on a new top, and I wouldn’t pay much attention to these minuscule changes. I see nothing concerning in those numbers, just a little creative writing in the comments section. Last, but most importantly, what else can you do? These numbers, with good borescope and compressions, and as long as it’s making full power, there is nothing you can/should do but fly!

I’m impressed by the energy of that impact. Those engines had to be making full thrust all the way to impact.